+1 Burdizzo. Last time moving the tracks to outside of town came up, west side rural residents threw a fit.

quote:

---

+1 Burdizzo. Last time moving the tracks to outside of town came up, west side rural residents threw a fit.

---

[Please keep this thread on topic. Thank you. -Staff]

[This message has been edited by TexAgs staff (edited 3/12/2013 9:54a).]

https://www.facebook.com/BrazosRiverBottomAlliance?ref=hl

All of the land is farmed. The soil is some of the best in the state...can grow anything. It is very porous with a water aquifer very near the surface. We have spoken to the county agent in Livonia, LA where UPR has a small rail yard. We were told that there are hazardous chemical spills daily and that UPR tries to cover them up so that they don't have to report them. I know someone who worked as a hazardous spill inspector at the rail yard in Houston. He confirmed there are frequent spills. The minor spills result from tank cars that leak...just a fact of life. Just walk along any railroad track and you can see the spills. The biggest danger is from rollovers if the radio controlled cars...27 cars derailed in the Engelwood yard in Houston last summer. As far as jobs, on net this rail yard will NOT add jobs to the local economy...numerous small businesses such as welders, combiners, mechanics, hay cutters, others who service the land, and even the farmers themselves will lose their livelihoods. Residents who own their homes and luve near the rail yard will see their home values decline by at least 50%. They will have to endure 24/7 noise generated by the slamming of rail cars when they couple. Would you like to have your quiet, peaceful country living transformed into a noisy industrial site? And would you want your child to attend a school within a few hundred yards of a very dangerous industrial site? The positives of this facility for the community do not outweigh the negatives. It needs to be built in the middle of nowhere so that it doesn't negatively impact so many people.

What is your real agenda, CSag? You are dredging up the same heresay and half truths, ten days after the last post.

This yard is going to be built. Land owners will be compensated. There will be an economic multiplier for the new jobs created by the railyard.

Give it a rest...

So we all should just shut up and let it happen, eh?

quote:

---

It needs to be built in the middle of nowhere so that it doesn't negatively impact so many people.

---

quote:

---

Residents who own their homes and luve near the rail yard will see their home values decline by at least 50%.

---

You have a source for this, or is it merely speculation on your part? How many houses are near this 1200 acres (about 2 square miles) that will be affected this way? What's the source of your data?

That would be nice...

quote:

---

It needs to be built in the middle of nowhere so that it doesn't negatively impact so many people.

---

That's going to leave a mark.

Burdizzo, Union pacific is not the government, so the Fifth Amendment doesn't apply.

Frito Bandito, are you on the UP take? You seem to know for certain that this railyard will be built. You also seem quite convinced that the landowners should roll over and "let" UP take their land so long as the compensation is just. What's just when the land is not for sale? Further, UP has never made a case that this is for the public good, unless of course you consider UP shareholders as the public here.

Railroads have right of way privileges going back to the 19th century that presume the public good.

[This message has been edited by techno-ag (edited 3/22/2013 11:41a).]

choo-choo's

[This message has been edited by Newbomb_Turk (edited 3/22/2013 12:09p).]

Techno-ag, you make my point. Just because railways have had right of way privileges since the 19th century that presume public good does not make it right. Perhaps it's time this presumption was challeged. This is land-taking pure and simple. I suspect UP would be hard-pressed to prove this project is for the public good and not UP's bottom line.

Efficient transportation is not for the public good? There aren't enough lanes on Hwy 6 to handle the intermodal traffic that now goes by rail through BCS.

I'm not associated with the UP; I don't even own their stock.

This railyard is being considered because there are 7 rail lines that converge in Hearne. Or maybe we should just raze Hearne and let them rebuild their yard there????

THAT ain't a bad idea.